On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 10:37:19AM -0700, Tim Harvey wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 10:00 AM Russell King - ARM Linux admin
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 04:48:24PM +, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> > > Stefan Agner writes:
> > >
> > > > On 16.03.2019 16:39, Russell King - ARM Linux admi
On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 10:00 AM Russell King - ARM Linux admin
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 04:48:24PM +, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> > Stefan Agner writes:
> >
> > > On 16.03.2019 16:39, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> > >> On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 01:33:58PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrot
On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 04:48:24PM +, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> Stefan Agner writes:
>
> > On 16.03.2019 16:39, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> >> On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 01:33:58PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> If you have a FS or partition table there, it does.
> >>> If you don't, I
Stefan Agner writes:
> On 16.03.2019 16:39, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 01:33:58PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> If you have a FS or partition table there, it does.
>>> If you don't, I agree ... that's a problem.
>>
>> eMMC boot partitions are called mmcblkXb
On 3/17/19 4:43 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 04:05:14PM +0100, Stefan Agner wrote:
>> On 16.03.2019 16:39, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 01:33:58PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
If you have a FS or partition table there, it
On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 04:05:14PM +0100, Stefan Agner wrote:
> On 16.03.2019 16:39, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 01:33:58PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> If you have a FS or partition table there, it does.
> >> If you don't, I agree ... that's a problem.
> >
On 16.03.2019 16:39, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 01:33:58PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> If you have a FS or partition table there, it does.
>> If you don't, I agree ... that's a problem.
>
> eMMC boot partitions are called mmcblkXbootY, and unless you have more
On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 01:33:58PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> If you have a FS or partition table there, it does.
> If you don't, I agree ... that's a problem.
eMMC boot partitions are called mmcblkXbootY, and unless you have more
than one eMMC device on the system, they can be found either by lo
On 3/16/19 1:22 PM, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> Marek Vasut writes:
>
>> On 3/15/19 10:52 PM, Tim Harvey wrote:
>>> Tim Harvey - Principal Software EngineerGateworks Corporation -
>>> http://www.gateworks.com/3026 S. Higuera St. San Luis Obispo CA
>>> 93401805-781-2000
>>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 4:39
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 4:00 PM Marek Vasut wrote:
>
> > Completely agree here - we need a dt solution that allows us to
> > specify ordering.
>
> Nope, ordering would be a policy and does not describe hardware, thus it
> shouldn't be in the DT. Use UUID or PARTUUID, they apply both to raw FS
Tim Harvey - Principal Software EngineerGateworks Corporation -
http://www.gateworks.com/3026 S. Higuera St. San Luis Obispo CA
93401805-781-2000
On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 4:00 PM Marek Vasut wrote:
>
> On 3/15/19 10:52 PM, Tim Harvey wrote:
> > Tim Harvey - Principal Software EngineerGateworks Corp
On 3/15/19 10:52 PM, Tim Harvey wrote:
> Tim Harvey - Principal Software EngineerGateworks Corporation -
> http://www.gateworks.com/3026 S. Higuera St. San Luis Obispo CA
> 93401805-781-2000
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 4:39 AM Måns Rullgård wrote:
>>
>> Douglas Anderson writes:
>>
>>> This series pi
Tim Harvey - Principal Software EngineerGateworks Corporation -
http://www.gateworks.com/3026 S. Higuera St. San Luis Obispo CA
93401805-781-2000
On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 4:39 AM Måns Rullgård wrote:
>
> Douglas Anderson writes:
>
> > This series picks patches from various different places to produ
Douglas Anderson writes:
> This series picks patches from various different places to produce what
> I consider the best solution to getting consistent mmc and mmcblk
> ordering.
>
> Why consistent ordering and why not just use UUIDs? IMHO consistent
> ordering solves a few different problems:
>
On Wed 2016-05-04 07:25:42, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 2:18 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Fri 2016-04-29 19:12:48, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 10:32:15AM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> >> > This series picks patches from various different places
On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 2:18 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Fri 2016-04-29 19:12:48, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 10:32:15AM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote:
>> > This series picks patches from various different places to produce what
>> > I consider the best solution to g
On Fri 2016-04-29 19:12:48, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 10:32:15AM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > This series picks patches from various different places to produce what
> > I consider the best solution to getting consistent mmc and mmcblk
> > ordering.
> >
> > Wh
On Sat, 2016-04-30 at 11:48 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 06:42:35PM -0400, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> > Maybe a third opinion could make this conversation constructive again.
And maybe a forth.
> > I think Doug's point is that using a UUID or labels for
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
>> My reply would be... why should MMC have special handling that no
>> other subsystem has?
>
> No other subsystem?
>
> * i2c allows numbering devices by alias
> * r
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 06:42:35PM -0400, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Maybe a third opinion could make this conversation constructive again.
>
> I think Doug's point is that using a UUID or labels for consistency is
> orthogonal to having a deterministic numbering for MMC devices. And I
> ag
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 05:31:31PM -0700, Peter Hurley wrote:
> FWIW, there is already a defacto expectation by boot configurations in the
> field that a given mmc block device is stable across boots. The reality
> is that 10's of kernel command lines look like:
>
> root=/dev/mmcblk0p2
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
> On 04/29/2016 05:03 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Peter Hurley
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 04/29/2016 04:01 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> > * serial allows numbering devices by alias.
>>
>> Whic
On 04/29/2016 05:03 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Peter Hurley
> wrote:
>
> On 04/29/2016 04:01 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > * serial allows numbering devices by alias.
>
> Which is in fact a total nightmare.
>
> While stable device order
On 04/29/2016 04:01 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> * serial allows numbering devices by alias.
Which is in fact a total nightmare.
While stable device order is mandatory in serial because of
console command line parameters and existing userspace expectations,
it is the number one barrier to providing
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> My reply would be... why should MMC have special handling that no
> other subsystem has?
No other subsystem?
* i2c allows numbering devices by alias
* rtc allows numbering devices by alias.
* serial allows numbering devices
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 03:22:50PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:56:38PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >> Russell,
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> >> wr
Hello Russell,
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:56:38PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Russell,
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:39:35PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrot
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:56:38PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Russell,
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:39:35PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> > [di
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:56:38PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Russell,
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:39:35PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > [didn't read most of your reply]
> >
> >> Really I just reposted it several times
Russell,
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:39:35PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> [didn't read most of your reply]
>
>> Really I just reposted it several times because I notice that you seem
>> to ignore many points of my emails. I was r
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:39:35PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
[didn't read most of your reply]
> Really I just reposted it several times because I notice that you seem
> to ignore many points of my emails. I was really hoping to get you to
> address this point. I notice that you still didn't.
Russell,
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> No, because you haven't taken the time to think and consider my
> reply, which gives you insight into how your "problem" is no
> different from the situation that everyone else has, where it
> isn't a problem.
I have cer
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:17:45PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 01:04:48PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >> Russell,
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> >> w
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 01:04:48PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Russell,
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
>> wrote:
>> >> * Presumably on a PC you've got an extra bit in the middle (like grub
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 01:04:48PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Russell,
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
> >> * Presumably on a PC you've got an extra bit in the middle (like grub
> >> or something like that) that can help you resolve your UUIDs even if
>
Russell,
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
>> * Presumably on a PC you've got an extra bit in the middle (like grub
>> or something like that) that can help you resolve your UUIDs even if
>> you get your kernel from somewhere else.
>
> You are over-estimating what
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> Your original two arguments don't really stand up.
>
> Let's take #2 to start with.
>
> You claim that coreboot doesn't have support to provide the correct UUID.
> Why is that a problem? Distros on x86 don't have support to
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:43:39PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Russell,
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 10:32:15AM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> >> This series picks patches from various different places to produce what
> >>
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:31:28PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Rob,
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Douglas Anderson
> > wrote:
> >> This series picks patches from various different places to produce what
> >> I consider the best s
Russell,
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 10:32:15AM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote:
>> This series picks patches from various different places to produce what
>> I consider the best solution to getting consistent mmc and mmcblk
>> orderin
Rob,
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Douglas Anderson
> wrote:
>> This series picks patches from various different places to produce what
>> I consider the best solution to getting consistent mmc and mmcblk
>> ordering.
>>
>> Why consisten
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 10:32:15AM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> This series picks patches from various different places to produce what
> I consider the best solution to getting consistent mmc and mmcblk
> ordering.
>
> Why consistent ordering and why not just use UUIDs? IMHO consistent
> ord
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Douglas Anderson
wrote:
> This series picks patches from various different places to produce what
> I consider the best solution to getting consistent mmc and mmcblk
> ordering.
>
> Why consistent ordering and why not just use UUIDs? IMHO consistent
> ordering so
This series picks patches from various different places to produce what
I consider the best solution to getting consistent mmc and mmcblk
ordering.
Why consistent ordering and why not just use UUIDs? IMHO consistent
ordering solves a few different problems:
1. For poor, feeble-minded humans like
44 matches
Mail list logo